Sukwant Singh vs The State of Uttarakhand and Others

Prafulla C. Pant, J.—Heard.

By means of this writ petition moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought quashing of the First Information Report No. 393 of 2010 (Crime No. 378 of 2010), relating to offence punishable u/s 302 of I.P.C., Police Station Ranipur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is a public servant (Forest Official). It is pointed out that from the First Information Report itself it is clear that the complainant''s father Babu Lal (deceased) had trespassed the reserve forest. There are cross versions of the incident regarding the killing of the father of the complainant. The case of the forest department is that their official in " Operation Arundati " had acted in discharge of their duties, and did not kill Babu Lal.

Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned counsel for the state, and after going through the papers on record, this court finds that even if the version of the complainant is taken to be true, it is a case of 304 of I.P.C., only.

5 In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation that if the petitioner Sukwant Singh, surrenders before the court concerned, his bail application shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay, keeping in mind that the petitioner was on duty in discharge of his public function at the time of the incident. (Stay Application No. 13120 of 2011 stands disposed of).